Thread: pgpool ABORT + no transaction warning

pgpool ABORT + no transaction warning

From
"Thomas F. O'Connell"
Date:
A while back, I posted about seeing a number of warnings from pgpool:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2005-03/msg00305.php

A typical pair of statements in my postgres logs looks like this:

WARNING:  there is no transaction in progress
STATEMENT:  ABORT

Tatsuo Ishii declared that these were harmless, and I took (and still
take) his word for it.

At some point in the past with my old configuration (postgres 8.1.3 /
pgpool 2.5.1) I did something that prevented the warnings from
showing up. On a system running postgres 8.1.3, I recently upgraded
pgpool from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. When I upgraded pgpool, I began seeing
the warnings again after a long window of not having seen them. My
configuration files for pgpool and postgres didn't change during the
upgrade, so I'm wondering what I might've been doing to avoid
polluting my logs with them previously and why they are showing up
again.

pgpool itself seems to be working fine after the upgrade, so as long
as the warnings are harmless, it's not a big deal, but I'd like a
clean method of preventing log noise if one exists.

--
Thomas F. O'Connell
Database Architecture and Programming
Co-Founder
Sitening, LLC

http://www.sitening.com/
3004 B Poston Avenue
Nashville, TN 37203-1314
615-260-0005 (cell)
615-469-5150 (office)
615-469-5151 (fax)


Re: pgpool ABORT + no transaction warning

From
Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
> A while back, I posted about seeing a number of warnings from pgpool:
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2005-03/msg00305.php
>
> A typical pair of statements in my postgres logs looks like this:
>
> WARNING:  there is no transaction in progress
> STATEMENT:  ABORT
>
> Tatsuo Ishii declared that these were harmless, and I took (and still
> take) his word for it.
>
> At some point in the past with my old configuration (postgres 8.1.3 /
> pgpool 2.5.1) I did something that prevented the warnings from
> showing up. On a system running postgres 8.1.3, I recently upgraded
> pgpool from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. When I upgraded pgpool, I began seeing
> the warnings again after a long window of not having seen them. My
> configuration files for pgpool and postgres didn't change during the
> upgrade, so I'm wondering what I might've been doing to avoid
> polluting my logs with them previously and why they are showing up
> again.
>
> pgpool itself seems to be working fine after the upgrade, so as long
> as the warnings are harmless, it's not a big deal, but I'd like a
> clean method of preventing log noise if one exists.

Could you tell me how to reproduce the problem?
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan

Re: pgpool ABORT + no transaction warning

From
Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
The problem is not reproduced here. Do you have any idea how to
reproduce it?
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan

> On Apr 1, 2006, at 8:01 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
> >> A while back, I posted about seeing a number of warnings from pgpool:
> >>
> >> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2005-03/msg00305.php
> >>
> >> A typical pair of statements in my postgres logs looks like this:
> >>
> >> WARNING:  there is no transaction in progress
> >> STATEMENT:  ABORT
> >>
> >> Tatsuo Ishii declared that these were harmless, and I took (and still
> >> take) his word for it.
> >>
> >> At some point in the past with my old configuration (postgres 8.1.3 /
> >> pgpool 2.5.1) I did something that prevented the warnings from
> >> showing up. On a system running postgres 8.1.3, I recently upgraded
> >> pgpool from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. When I upgraded pgpool, I began seeing
> >> the warnings again after a long window of not having seen them. My
> >> configuration files for pgpool and postgres didn't change during the
> >> upgrade, so I'm wondering what I might've been doing to avoid
> >> polluting my logs with them previously and why they are showing up
> >> again.
> >
> > Could you tell me how to reproduce the problem?
>
> Here's what happened: I performed an on-line backup and recovery to
> move postgres from one server to another. On the new server, I
> installed pgpool 3.0.1 and copied over my old configuration files.
>
> I have two instances of pgpool running on the server and am only
> using pgpool for connection pooling, not load balancing or
> replication. The only three settings that are different between the
> two configurations are port, logdir, and num_init_children.
>
> Below is one pgpool.conf (with a few paths changed back to the
> defaults just for obfuscation), which doesn't include
> child_max_connections, insert_lock, or ignore_leading_white_space
> because I just used my 2.5.1 configuration file. I assume it would
> just  use defaults for these values if they weren't specified in the
> file?
>
> listen_addresses = '*'
> port = 9999
> socket_dir = '/tmp'
> backend_host_name = ''
> backend_port = 5432
> backend_socket_dir = '/tmp'
> secondary_backend_host_name = ''
> secondary_backend_port = 0
> num_init_children = 64
> max_pool = 4
> child_life_time = 300
> connection_life_time = 10
> logdir = '/tmp/pgpool1'
> replication_mode = false
> replication_strict = true
> replication_timeout = 5000
> load_balance_mode = false
> weight_master = 0.5
> weight_secondary = 0.5
> replication_stop_on_mismatch = false
> reset_query_list = 'ABORT; RESET ALL; SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION DEFAULT'
> print_timestamp = true
> master_slave_mode = false
> connection_cache = true
> health_check_timeout = 20
> health_check_period = 0
> health_check_user = 'nobody'
>
> --
> Thomas F. O'Connell
> Database Architecture and Programming
> Co-Founder
> Sitening, LLC
>
> http://www.sitening.com/
> 3004 B Poston Avenue
> Nashville, TN 37203-1314
> 615-260-0005 (cell)
> 615-469-5150 (office)
> 615-469-5151 (fax)
>

Re: pgpool ABORT + no transaction warning

From
"Thomas F. O'Connell"
Date:
On Apr 3, 2006, at 3:05 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:

> The problem is not reproduced here. Do you have any idea how to
> reproduce it?

If I did, I'd resolve it. :P

I suppose I can try restarting the connection pools on this server
just to see what happens. If I am able to do that, I will post the
results.

--
Thomas F. O'Connell
Database Architecture and Programming
Co-Founder
Sitening, LLC

http://www.sitening.com/
3004 B Poston Avenue
Nashville, TN 37203-1314
615-260-0005 (cell)
615-469-5150 (office)
615-469-5151 (fax)


>> On Apr 1, 2006, at 8:01 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>
>>>> A while back, I posted about seeing a number of warnings from
>>>> pgpool:
>>>>
>>>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2005-03/msg00305.php
>>>>
>>>> A typical pair of statements in my postgres logs looks like this:
>>>>
>>>> WARNING:  there is no transaction in progress
>>>> STATEMENT:  ABORT
>>>>
>>>> Tatsuo Ishii declared that these were harmless, and I took (and
>>>> still
>>>> take) his word for it.
>>>>
>>>> At some point in the past with my old configuration (postgres
>>>> 8.1.3 /
>>>> pgpool 2.5.1) I did something that prevented the warnings from
>>>> showing up. On a system running postgres 8.1.3, I recently upgraded
>>>> pgpool from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. When I upgraded pgpool, I began seeing
>>>> the warnings again after a long window of not having seen them. My
>>>> configuration files for pgpool and postgres didn't change during
>>>> the
>>>> upgrade, so I'm wondering what I might've been doing to avoid
>>>> polluting my logs with them previously and why they are showing up
>>>> again.
>>>
>>> Could you tell me how to reproduce the problem?
>>
>> Here's what happened: I performed an on-line backup and recovery to
>> move postgres from one server to another. On the new server, I
>> installed pgpool 3.0.1 and copied over my old configuration files.
>>
>> I have two instances of pgpool running on the server and am only
>> using pgpool for connection pooling, not load balancing or
>> replication. The only three settings that are different between the
>> two configurations are port, logdir, and num_init_children.
>>
>> Below is one pgpool.conf (with a few paths changed back to the
>> defaults just for obfuscation), which doesn't include
>> child_max_connections, insert_lock, or ignore_leading_white_space
>> because I just used my 2.5.1 configuration file. I assume it would
>> just  use defaults for these values if they weren't specified in the
>> file?
>>
>> listen_addresses = '*'
>> port = 9999
>> socket_dir = '/tmp'
>> backend_host_name = ''
>> backend_port = 5432
>> backend_socket_dir = '/tmp'
>> secondary_backend_host_name = ''
>> secondary_backend_port = 0
>> num_init_children = 64
>> max_pool = 4
>> child_life_time = 300
>> connection_life_time = 10
>> logdir = '/tmp/pgpool1'
>> replication_mode = false
>> replication_strict = true
>> replication_timeout = 5000
>> load_balance_mode = false
>> weight_master = 0.5
>> weight_secondary = 0.5
>> replication_stop_on_mismatch = false
>> reset_query_list = 'ABORT; RESET ALL; SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION
>> DEFAULT'
>> print_timestamp = true
>> master_slave_mode = false
>> connection_cache = true
>> health_check_timeout = 20
>> health_check_period = 0
>> health_check_user = 'nobody'